Who will the newest SUPREME COURT Justice? What is the Strategy?

[AtLast]

My thoughts here go to the generational differences between mother & daughter.... and to the fact that many women do not have positive relationships with their mothers, especially around the these generational opinions of what constitutes fulfillment for women.

Like so many accomplished women in what remains a man's world (let's not lid ourselves), Kagan is driven and most likely had to make many decisions to get where she has been and is going that put aside things like marriage (same-sex or otherwise) or having children (as a partnered or single woman).

Hummmm.... speaking to balance (Martina brought this up).... her ability to hear other's opinions prior to making her own tells me she has good communication skills. Read or listen to some of her presentations to the Supreme Court. She also includes key points of understanding of what a justice stated prior to making her point back. I don't believe she is driven beyond being human... I think she actually took care of herself in building her career and not trying to be super woman. Unless you do have a supportive partner (one a whole hell of a lot of money) that does share with all of that has to get done in life, trying to do it all is not a healthy road for everyone in these kinds of professions. Then again, I tend to be pro-partnership/marriage- as long as it is one in which there is sharing of labor! Not everyone is.


Something that is bothering me is her record at Harvard in hiring so many non-POC in tenure-track positions. Then again, as the first female Dean, I'm sure she had her share of criticism and every single hire was scrutinized.

Personally, I’m glad she has not been on the bench. Guess that’s up for debate.

I am not thrilled with Kagan’s appointment overall, however. Too middle of the road for me. And she just doesn’t strike me as a champion of civil liberties, especially concerning detainees as in Gitmo. I feel like Obama played it safe, again….

Just have to study her more, I guess. Right now all of the initially criticisms are being spewed. Sounds like there are some issues about her ideas about the First Amendment.... Dunno...[/COLOR][/FONT]

[Soon]

A Liberal Analysis of Elena Kagan

[Andrew, Jr.]

I am glad Ms. Kegan was appointed, and I do hope that she does bring about change. God knows we need it.

[UofMfan]

Diane Wood would have been the better and bolder choice, especially since it has been predicted that Dems will lose the majority this November, so this was the opportune time. Not the time to play nice.

What little record there is available on Kegan does not make me jump up and down with joy, but who knows, she may surprise me.

When Bush jr. appointed Roberts and Alito he did not try to play nice, and with those two appointments he shaped the Conservative face of the Court that is today and will be for a long time.

[Martina]

This guy says that criticizing her as careerist when Roberts' record was just the same is sexist. i would say the same about him. People who have planned and carried out a career trajectory from the bassonette make me nervous -- but whatever.

There is no info about her of any heft. We will have to wait and hope. i hate that government is like this. We can't KNOW what we are getting because to have a record means that you are too easy to tear down. It's an argument not to stand for anything. To wait and hold on until it's your opportunity. What kind of people does that create? Not my kind.

http://trueslant.com/jamellebouie/20...little-sexist/

[Martina]

Here's some more of this "sexist" criticism. Sorry i agree


from http://www.theatlanticwire.com/opini...Careerist-3562

A Brown-Noser?

David Brooks at The New York Times likens Kagan to other Ivy League "organization kids"--ladder-climbers who seldom challenge their superiors: "If they had any flaw, it was that they often had a professional and strategic attitude toward life. They were not intellectual risk-takers. They regarded professors as bosses to be pleased rather than authorities to be challenged... She seems to be smart, impressive and honest — and in her willingness to suppress so much of her mind for the sake of her career, kind of disturbing."'


Institution-Bound, Careerist, writes civil libertarian blogger Glenn Greenwald at Salon:

"It's anything but surprising that President Obama has chosen Elena Kagan to replace John Paul Stevens on the Supreme Court. Nothing is a better fit for this White House than a blank slate, institution-loyal, seemingly principle-free careerist who spent the last 15 months as the Obama administration's lawyer vigorously defending every one of his assertions of extremely broad executive authority."


Good at Advancing, but Where's the Scholarship? wonders Jonathan Zasloff:

"Consider that Kagan first got tenure at the University of Chicago based on two articles — which usually is what that notoriously overachieving faculty wants in one year from a junior professor. Then she got an academic chair at Harvard based on one more piece, Presidential Administration. She wrote nothing else for more than two years at Harvard. And then she was appointed Dean. This shows that Kagan may not be a great scholar, but she is enormously skilled at impressing older colleagues."

Not a Bold, Progressive Figure, writes liberal blogger Cenk Uygur at the Huffington Post:

"Elena Kagan - safe, no record, never challenged power in any meaningful way, never stood up for progressive ideology, beloved by the establishment in Washington - the perfect Obama candidate. I'm tired of it."


Remarkably Cautious, writes Tom Goldstein, publisher of SCOTUSblog.

He describes her as "extraordinarily-almost artistically-careful. I don’t know anyone who has had a conversation with her in which she expressed a personal conviction on a question of constitutional law in the past decade. Now, there are obviously an awful lot of people whom I do not know. But I have never talked to anyone who talked to anyone who had a conversation like that."

[Martina]

Here's the whole David Brooks thing. i must say i am rarely a fan of Brooks. But i think he is on the money here --

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/11/opinion/11brooks.html